We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

EPA sued over hardrock mining financial responsibility rule decision.

Environmental organizations have filed a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision not to issue a regulation that would have imposed federal financial responsibility requirements on certain hardrock mining facilities under Section 108 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLA § 108 granted EPA authority to establish financial responsibility rules for classes of facilities. When EPA had not taken action, advocacy groups sued EPA, and in 2015, the D.C. Circuit approved a settlement that gave EPA until Dec. 1, 2017, to decide whether to issue regulations for the hardrock mining industry. In December, EPA announced that it would not issue requirements, finding that the proposed regulation was unnecessary because, in part, the degree and duration of risks associated with modern hardrock industry practices did not warrant imposing financial responsibility requirements for the hardrock mining sector.

Compare jurisdictions:Oil & Gas

In common with many in-house lawyers, I have limited access to (and a limited budget for) resources and rely on receiving know-how from friends and contacts in private practice. Lexology is great as it provides a daily email with the headlines in all the areas of law that I am interested in (which are all relevant to me, as I was able to choose which areas I was interested in at registration), with links to articles from a wide variety of sources.

I tend to scroll through the daily email when I am having my lunch, reading the headlines and descriptions of the articles, and click on any items that are of interest to me - that way, I feel like I am kept 'in the loop' with legal developments.

In addition to the daily email, I find the articles themselves very helpful - they set out the legal principle but most importantly, they 'boil it down' to the practical implications. When I am doing legal research, I also find the archive search function very helpful.

I have recommended the service to quite a few friends who have also found it very helpful."